It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: EternalShadow
Why is she less deserving of her rights simply because of what she does for a living.
It's perfectly legal.
originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ghostrager
Women aren't stupid. Trump was s great guy until he ran against Hillary, suddenly he's the bogeyman. The amount of collusion is so transparent it's sickening and just goes to show Hillary believes people are truly stupid.
Cheers - Dave
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: jerryznv
She wasn't a prostitute, she was a film star/sex educator. Do you think any film star who has a sex scene should give it up for anyone with money?
originally posted by: jerryznv
a reply to: redhorse
So, she decided 10k wasn't worth it. Good for her.
That's a lot of assuming...
I'd have to believe she was being honest first...but supposing she is honest...I'd have to wonder what her normal fee was if 10K wasn't enough?
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: jerryznv
She wasn't a prostitute, she was a film star/sex educator. Do you think any film star who has a sex scene should give it up for anyone with money?
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: jerryznv
She's an actress.
But still, 355 times she has been paid to have sex.